Cynthia
Frank ("Plaintiff") appeals from the Opinion and
Award of the North Carolina Industrial Commission
("Commission"), which determined the amount of her
average weekly wages and compensation rate. We affirm the
Commission's Opinion and Award.

I.
Background

Plaintiff
was employed by the Charlotte Symphony Orchestra
("Defendant-Employer") as a violist. On 24 June
2012, Plaintiff filed a Form 18 ("Notice of

Accident to Employer and Claim of Employee, Representative,
or Dependent") with the Commission. She alleged
sustaining a compensable injury and/or occupational disease
to her right shoulder. Plaintiff listed her average weekly
wages as "$760.00" on the Form 18, and stated both
the number of hours per day and the days of the week she
worked "varies." Plaintiff listed her date of
injury as 15 December 2013.

Defendant-Employer
and its insurance carrier (collectively,
"Defendants") filed a Form 61 ("Denial of
Workers' Compensation Claim"). Plaintiff's claim
was heard before the deputy commissioner on 22 June 2015.
Prior to the hearing, Defendants accepted Plaintiff's
shoulder injury as compensable. The parties agreed the only
issue to be determined by the deputy commissioner was the
calculation of Plaintiff's average weekly wages.

The
deputy commissioner issued her Opinion and Award and
determined Plaintiff's average weekly wages to be
$757.94, which produced a compensation rate of $505.32.
Plaintiff appealed the determination of her average weekly
wages to the Commission.

By
Opinion and Award dated 7 December 2016, the Commission
unanimously affirmed the deputy commissioner's
determination of Plaintiff's average weekly wages and
compensation rate. Plaintiff appeals.

II.
Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction
lies in this Court from opinion and award of the Commission
pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 97-86 and 7A-27(b)
(2015).

III.
Average Weekly Wages

Plaintiff's
sole argument on appeal asserts the Commission erred by
applying the incorrect method under N.C. Gen. Stat. §
97-2(5) (2015) to calculate her average weekly wages. We
disagree.

A.
Standard of Review

This
Court reviews an opinion and award of the Commission to
determine whether the findings of fact are supported by
competent evidence and whether the conclusions of law are
supported by the findings of fact. Barham v. Food
World, 300 N.C. 329, 331, 266 S.E.2d 676, 678 (1980).
However, "[t]his Court reviews the Commission's
conclusions of law de novo." McLaughlin v.
Staffing Solutions, 206 N.C.App. 137, 143, 696 S.E.2d
839, 844 (2004) (citation omitted).

Our website includes the first part of the main text of the court's opinion.
To read the entire case, you must purchase the decision for download. With purchase,
you also receive any available docket numbers, case citations or footnotes, dissents
and concurrences that accompany the decision.
Docket numbers and/or citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a
legal proceeding. Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision. If the document contains a simple affirmation or denial without discussion,
there may not be additional text.

Buy This Entire Record For
$7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.